Suresh Nana Rohakale v. Cidco Of Maharashtra Ltd.

1 WP-8385.13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8385 OF 2013 Suresh Nana Rohakale ...PETITIONER versus City & Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Limited ...RESPONDENT .....

Mr. S.G. Shinde, Advocate for petitioner Mr. A.S. Bajaj,Advocate for respondent .....

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.

DATED : 9th JUNE, 2016.

Order :-

1. Mr. Shinde, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner was allotted plot No. 308 by the respondent - Corporation and thereafter new plots are created by it bearing Nos. 308/A and 308/B. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to purchase said plot being adjacent plots and he is required to be given preference for the same. 2.

Mr. Bajaj, learned counsel for respondent - Corporation that plots No. 308/A and 308/B are not odd shape plots but they are independent and saleable plots and the same has to be allotted by auction.

3.

It is not disputed that petitioner is allotted plot No. 308. As per respondent, petitioner is co-allottee of said plot along with one Sudam

2 WP-8385.13 Murlidhar Shengale and he has right to claim adjacent odd shape plots, however, as submitted by respondent on affidavit that plots No. 308A and 308/B are independent and saleable plots, the petitioner cannot claim any vested right to purchase said plots as same are to be disposed of by auction.

4.

In light of the above, prayers in the writ petition cannot be considered. Writ petition, as such, stands disposed of. No costs. Sd/- Sd/- [ K. K. SONAWANE, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] MTK